Ed Rendell

The strangest thing happened last night on MSNBC -- its self-proclaimed civics geek Rachel Maddow ignored the results not one but two special elections the day before to fill vacancies in the House.

I know, I know, hard to believe. I mean, every time Maddow does report on elections results -- such as when Democrats win -- she'll segue into her reporting by mock drumming to NBC's bombastic election night music in the background. The woman eats and breathes elections. Can there be much doubt that Maddow camped outside her polling place the night before she first cast a vote to avoid lines in the morning? (video after page break)

Liberals like Rachel Maddow and former Pennsylvania governor Ed Rendell often express their deep and abiding concern for the well-being of children. Well, most children anyway. Providing they aren't "hideous".

On her show last night, Maddow was talking about New York Times' columnist Paul Krugman suggesting that Americans should respond to our economic malaise as if threatened by invasion from outer space. Much the same idea has been expressed before, Maddow pointed out, citing an episode of the '60s TV show "The Outer Limits" and the graphic novel and movie "Watchmen" as precedents. (video after page break)

Former Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell, D, can't seem to make up his mind on whether Fox News is "fair and balanced," or an ideologically-stilted - possibly malicious - political operation.

Rendell appeared on Ed Schultz's program Monday night to announce - presumably with a straight face - the removal by a New York Magazine cover story of the "thin veneer of impartiality that Fox may have."

But just a few years ago, when Rendell was campaigning hard for Hillary Clinton, he had effusive praise for Fox, which he called "the most objective of all the cable networks."

In an Associated Press report by Patrick Walters yesterday afternoon, the following two reasons were offered as to why the Philadelphia abortion "clinic" operated by Dr. Kermit Gosnell, who was arrested and charged earlier this week "with murdering seven babies and one woman who went to him for an abortion," had not been inspected since 1993:

• Democratic former Governor Ed Rendell, who left office on Tuesday after eight years as Keystone State chief executive, claimed that officials at the Pennsylvania Department of Health (DOH), in the AP's words, "didn't think its authority extended to abortion clinics."
• The grand jury indictment of Dr. Gosnell says that DOH "decided, for political reasons, to stop inspecting abortion clinics at all."

According to the indictment handed down against Gosnell, the hard-to-handle first explanation (If DOH doesn't have jurisdiction, who does? No one?) is a subset of the second, i.e., the opinion on lack of jurisdiction was part of a longer-term effort to come up with reasons to avoid inspections. Walters never told readers that, and in doing so largely let Rendell off the hook for the fact that almost half of 17-years involved -- the longest time period of any Keystone State governor contemporaneous with the non-inspection regime of non-inspection occurred on his watch (the others: Bob Casey, prolife Democrat, somewhere between 13 months and two years; Tom Ridge, prochoice Republican, 6-3/4 years; Mark Schweiker, prolife Republican, 15 months). Walters also saved the grand jury's overall "political reasons" assessment for Paragraphs 9-12 after giving Rendell's explanation paragraphs 1-4.

Bob Casey? Yes, though the grand jury for some reason didn't recognize it.

Here are the relevant paragraphs from Walters' report:

Grilling Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell on Monday's CBS Early Show, co-host Maggie Rodriguez questioned President Obama attacking Republicans over unproven claims of accepting foreign campaign donations: "Why did he spend so much time talking about the Republicans trying to steal the election? Offering no evidence of that. Isn't it a bit undignified for the President to resort to that?"
 
The Democratic governor attempted to defend the President: "Well, the President's got dual roles, he's the commander-in-chief...but he's also the campaigner-in-chief....[talking] about what's to be afraid of....the unreported money that's coming into this campaign through groups that we'll never know who contributed to, that's something our citizens should be worried about." Rodriguez pressed him: "If you gave them evidence to support that claim, it would be one thing. But, to make claims like this without backing them up, seems not right."
f...but he's also the campaigner-in-chief....[talking] about what's to be afraid of....the unreported money that's coming into this campaign through groups that we'll never know who contributed to, that's something our citizens should be worried about." Rodriguez pressed him: "If you gave them evidence to support that claim, it would be one thing. But, to make claims like this without backing them up, seems not right."

As we near the midterm elections, left-wingers will be reading from the same tired playbook – the attempted marginalization of the Tea Party movement, but just more of it. But more and more, they are discovering the tactics are tougher to defend, as their side has their own fringe, loose-cannon elements.

On CNBC’s Sept. 29 “Squawk Box,” hosts Joe Kernen and Michelle Caruso-Cabrera went after Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell for what seems to be hypocrisy – a willingness to attack one side for extremism, while ignoring extreme elements on the left. Rendell was asked by Kernen to elaborate on remarks he made earlier this month, that some Republicans are “fruit loops,” “whackos,” and “flat-out crazy.”

KERNEN: I want to talk to you about something, later about -- you're calling Tea Party people wing nuts and fruit loops?
RENDELL: Not all of them.
KERNEN: Not all of them? You saw the president, the president basically said that most of them, most of the Tea Party “are directed and financed by powerful and special interests lobbies,” this is in the Journal today. That's most of them and the rest of them are bigots. So you're either directed by special interests …
RENDELL: I don't believe it.
KERNEN: Seventy-one percent of Republicans, according to this poll today in the Journal identify – so, you've just trashed the entire half of the country.
CARUSO-CABRERA: He says slowly but surely, the GOP is taken over by whackos.
RENDELL: There’s no question about that.

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell on Tuesday came down on President Obama for going on ABC's "The View."

As NewsBusters previously reported, Obama on Thursday will become the first sitting president to appear on this daytime ladies talk show.

"I think there's got to be a little bit of dignity to the Presidency," Rendell told the crew at MSNBC's "Morning Joe." 

After some protests from host Mika Brzezinski and Willie Geist, Rendell said, "I wouldn't put him on Jerry Springer either" (video follows with transcript and commentary): 

On Wednesday, Newsweek's Andrew Romano celebrated news out of Indiana that "establishment" Republican Dan Coats fended off two conservative opponents in the Senate primary.

Romano's obvious delight came through loud and clear starting with the headline, "The Tea Party is Now Irrelevant in Indiana." You see, one loss in a Senate primary was enough to declare the movement DOA - and Romano was anxious for the rest of the media to play along.

The real headline in Indiana was that 52 percent of Republicans went in favor of Tea Party challengers, but two of them in the mix was enough to split the vote, and Coats squeaked by at 39 percent.

A few media sources, including Politico, reported that Coats limped out of the primary "bruised" by anti-incumbency. Romano, however, insisted that 39 percent was a clear victory. Why the stark difference in coverage? According to Romano, some in the media were glorifying Tea Parties to apparently advance some selfish narrative.

Try not to cough from the smell of irony as you watch a Newsweek writer complain about dishonest narratives being perpetrated by the media:

So you do your part and pay your taxes to the federal government. However, you feel you pay too much and you don't like how that same government uses that money. Do you have the right to petition and protest that government?

If it's on federal land that your tax dollars paid for, then your protest is hypocritical nonsense, according to MSNBC host Rachel Maddow. To her, the tea partiers, who protested on the government land of the National Mall, are hypocrites. Worse,  they're getting unwarranted media coverage.

"In the case of the tea partiers, though, mainstream media coverage has been willing to almost assume that they're making sense, even in the face of evidence to the contrary," Maddow said on her April 21 program. "Because the idea of being in favor of smaller government, the idea that government is inherently wasteful and incompetent and should be shrunk, because that idea has shifted from a conservative movement talking point 30 years ago to centrist Beltway common wisdom today, sometimes we don't recognize the hypocrisy when it's right in our face. The conservative movement won the framing fight. It doesn't sound crazy anymore to rail against the federal government while standing in a national park until you really think about it."

Warren Buffett, the second richest man in the world and CEO of Berkshire Hathaway (NYSE:BRK.A), doesn't have much faith in the future of print media.

In an interview on CNBC's Nov. 3 "Squawk Box," following the announcement of his purchase of Burlington Northern (NYSE:BNI), Buffett was asked to comment on the future of news media, in particular newspapers and business news by "Squawk Box" co-host Becky Quick. Buffett is optimistic on the future of business news.

"Our system has just gotten started," Buffett said. "I mean, we've had a couple of hundred years of progress, but we have not exhausted our potential in this country. America's about business and business in America, you know have gone to greatness hand and hand. So, you do not need to worry about CNBC 10 or 20 or 30 years from now. Business will always be important to the American public."

Chris Matthews, on Tuesday's "Hardball," painted town hall protesters as racist as he charged, "I think some of the people are upset because we have a black president." Matthews invited on Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell and the Wall Street Journal's Stephen Moore to analyze the uproar at the town hall meetings and after Moore offered that some of the protesters' rage was caused by the "$800 billion obscene fiscal stimulus bill," Matthews interjected with his own explanation for the anger as he exclaimed: "Are you telling me that these guys were created by this new president? That the people we're watching on television with their guns and their attitudes about the republic weren't around before January 20th?!...Okay I think, I think some of the people are upset because we have a black president." [audio available here]

The following exchange was aired on the August 11, edition of "Hardball:"

Eleanor Clift is by no stretch a conservative apologist, but her reporting in Newsweek on the Specter switch exposes an angle that the broadcast networks are omitting: the Machiavellian maneuvers behind-the-scenes to coax Specter to jump the GOP ship.

Of particular interest is Clift's revelation that Gov. Ed Rendell's motive for pushing Specter to become a Democrat was to shut down a potential Democratic rival for the U.S. Senate, Rep. Joe Sestak (Pa.) [emphasis mine].:

 Those who know Rendell say he really wants the seat that Specter holds but would not run against his friend. The scenario that was unfolding had Specter losing in the Republican primary to Club for Growth President Pat Toomy, the favorite of Pennsylvania's conservative Republican base, and then had Toomy losing to a Democrat in November 2010. The Democrat suiting up for that task was Rep. Joe Sestak, a retired Navy admiral in his second term, eager to move up, and at 57 years of age, young enough to stake a claim on the seat.

A Sestak candidacy would derail Rendell's future plans. Keeping Specter in the seat at his age, which is 79, makes it far more likely that the seat would open up in the kind of timetable Rendell would hope for.

I was dismayed and angry to learn recently that the Philadelphia Inquirer is seeking a $10 million government bailout from my home state of Pennsylvania. My own discontent and the discontent of NB commenters over the possible bailout was made clear in my earlier NewsBusters post on the subject but now its apparent that we are not alone. Chris Freind of the Philadelphia Bulletin, the reporter who interviewed Democrat Governor Ed Rendell's press secretary about the Inquirer bailout, has chronicled the reaction to the news.

Nobody interviewed, including the Media Research Center's own Brent Bozell, had anything nice to say about Rendell's plan to give money to the Inquirer:

With more and more reports coming out that MSNBC's Chris Matthews is actively looking to run for Senate in his home state of Pennsylvania, questions about a conflict of interest have been raised. Can the host fairly cover the Democratic Party when he's actively trying to join its Senate ranks, and even more specifically, how objective can he be when he's interviewing Pennsylvania Democrats like frequent "Hardball" guest Governor Ed Rendell?

Well, if this week is any indication, Matthews is failing that objectivity test as he has yet to mention on "Hardball", the controversy surrounding a, some believe, sexist remark Rendell made about Arizona Governor Janet Napolitano having more time to devote to being Homeland Security Secretary because she has "no life."

During a discussion with co-host Maggie Rodriguez on Thursday’s CBS Early Show, liberal blogger Arianna Huffington, remarked that: "The problem with Sarah Palin was not anything to do with her being a woman. It had to do with her antediluvian views on creationism, her lack of curiosity, her lack of interest in the world around her."

The segment was about an open mic gaffe by Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, who said of Arizona Governor and Obama’s Homeland Security secretary nominee Janet Napolitano: "Janet's perfect for that job. Because for that job, you have to have no life. Janet has no family. Perfect." Rodriguez turned to Huffington and asked: "So what did you think about Governor Rendell's comment. Did you think it was sexist?" Huffington vigorously defended Napolitano: "I think that is really...an illusion about a woman's life. Like Janet Napolitano has a very rich life. I mean, she plays tennis twice a week and nobody in her staff can interfere with that sacred time. She actually climbed Mount Kilimanjaro. She goes river rafting. She loves movies and the opera."

However, Rodriguez observed: "You talked a lot about perceptions of women, especially women in politics, during the campaign, when Sarah Palin was in the news. And on your blog you openly criticized her." Huffington offered no defense of Palin: "Well, I thought that Sarah Palin, in a way, summed up what happens when you're not curious. When you're not interested in what is going on in the world. Because my problem with her was really her response to Katie Couric, when she was asked 'what do you read?' and she couldn't give an answer."

At first glance, it's hard to figure out who is the bigger buffoon:

• Is it Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell, for suggesting that Arizona Governor and Obama Homeland Security Secretary-Designate Janet Napolitano is perfect for her presumptive position because she's single and can therefore "have no life"?
• Or is it CNN's Campbell Brown, for criticizing Rendell's sexism and bias against employees who don't have families -- after Brown herself suggested in September that Sarah Palin shouldn't have accepted John McCain's vice-presidential nomination because of her daughter's pregnancy?

Here are excerpts from the program transcript (video here), including Rendell's howler, and Brown's subsequent hypocritical editorializing (HT Tall Cotton):

Heading into the campaign's final stretch, Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell said to lefty radio host Ed Schultz that John McCain and Sarah Palin spent so much time in the Keystone State, "I'm thinking of charging them state income tax they've been here so often."

The quip drew hearty laughter from a union audience for Schultz's show on Oct. 29 from United Steelworkers' headquarters in Pittsburgh.

But then Rendell said this about what would result from imposing Pennsylvania income taxes on the GOP candidates -- "it would be good for our economy." And while Rendell was clearly kidding about levying taxes on McCain and Palin, Rendell wasn't kidding about what he believes would result if he did.

Click here for mp3 audio.

Needless to say, the dutiful Schultz didn't correct Rendell of his flawed assumption, having thoroughly absorbed the same belief. 

The next day, for example, Schultz had this to say at a town hall meeting he moderated in Asheville, N.C. --

Pennsylvania Governor Ed Rendell had some harsh words for members of the media today, especially those associated with the cable network MSNBC.

Speaking at a discussion put together by the Joan Shorenstein Center on Press, Politics and Public Policy, he called the coverage of Barack Obama "embarrassing," and accused MSNBC of being "the official network of the Obama campaign."

UPDATE at end of post: "Fox & Friends" weighs in.

As reported by Michael Calderone at Politico Sunday (h/t NB reader Wisdom6773, file photo courtesy USA Today):

It certainly has been a fun day for folks that believe beyond a shadow of a doubt the media have a decidedly leftward slant.

Not only did we learn that Hillary Clinton confidant Lanny Davis thinks MSNBC and Chris Matthews are "shamelessly biased," but he is also not pleased with CNN, and, much like Gov. Ed Rendell (D-PA), believes that "in this campaign, [Fox News] have [sic] been religiously middle-of-the-road."

Talk about your delicious trifectas!

As reported by Politico Friday (emphasis added throughout, h/t our good friend Johnny $, picture courtesy View Images):

When it comes to media bias, if liberals are not only able to recognize your press organization's lack of impartiality, but also assert such when cameras are rolling, you know you're not fooling anybody.

Such appears to certainly be the case with cable network MSNBC, and, in particular, its "Countdown" host, which both were the targets of Pennsylvania Gov. Ed Rendell (D) a few weeks ago when he actually stated three times on PBS's "Charlie Rose," "Keith Olbermann should be on the Obama payroll."

With Olbermann's sycophantic behavior during this campaign, what makes Rendell think he's not?

With that in mind, the following extraordinarily candid discussion on March 26 that somehow slipped under the radar until now is sure to delight all those disgusted with the behavior of MSNBC employees (h/t Olbermann Watch via Hot Air, video embedded upper right):

Here's something you never hear from a Democrat: of all the cable networks, Fox News is doing the fairest job covering an issue.

Yet, that's exactly what Gov. Ed Rendell (D-Penn.), an outspoken Hillary Clinton supporter, said on "Fox & Friends" Monday.

I kid you not.

Speaking with host Steve Doocy, Rendell said the following (h/t TVNewser via NBer Thomas Stewart):

Ed Rendell is too truthful to be a good vice-presidential candidate. Just ask him. The Pennsylvania governor and Hillary supporter was a guest on this afternoon's Hardball. Wrapping up the interview, host Chris Matthews broached his availability as Veep.

CHRIS MATTHEWS: Do you think the Democrats have a shot at carrying Florida on the best of conditions this year?

ED RENDELL: Oh, absolutely, absolutely. Particularly when the issues about Social Security are fashioned. I think this is going to be the best chance we've had to carry Florida since 2000.

MATTHEWS: I think Hillary has a better chance than Barack in Florida.

RENDELL: No question.

MATTHEWS: But I think Barack has a better chance if you're his running mate. Would you be available, Governor, to be a running-mate with Barack Obama--

On March 9, my colleague Tim Graham pointed out the delicious hypocrisy of a Hillary Clinton supporter advocating using electoral votes to decide the Democrat presidential nomination.

On Sunday, another Hillary backer, Sen. Evan Bayh (D-Ind.), made a similar recommendation, even though he's on the record as having been against the Electoral College in the past (pictured right courtesy AP).

In fact, since George W. Bush's victory over Al Gore in 2000, wherein the former had more electoral votes despite the latter's popular vote advantage, the Electoral College has been a common whipping boy of Democrats and liberal press representatives.

With that in mind, as this talk likely heats up in the coming months, will the Electoral College haters in the media flipflop on this issue as well? While you ponder, here's the New York Times' take on Monday (emphasis added throughout):

A couple days ago, speculating that Contessa Brewer might be a closet conservative, I expressed the hope that I wasn't making trouble for her at MSNBC. Maybe I did. For the anchor now has gone out of her way to express PC sentiments that almost make you wonder whether she wasn't trying to prove her liberal bona fides to her MSNBC honchos.

 

Jesse Jackson would normally be the last person who'd need to be persuaded to take offense at any comment that could possibly be considered to have racial overtones. Usually, it's a case of duck meets junebug.

But for whatever reason, interviewed by Brewer on MSNBC this afternoon at 4:18 PM ET, Jackson was on his way to taking the high road regarding Ed Rendell's recent remark about some whites in Pennsylvania being unwilling to vote for blacks . . . until Contessa cut in to point out the possible racial slight. Jackson took the hint and proceeded to express the criticism Brewer had apparently been hoping for.